16710 with a damaged case from a Trusted seller here

[Syed117]

Originally Posted by imperio

Personally I think there is no smoke w/o fire. If an allegation like this is being made against ANY seller I think the greater community would like to be made aware of who it is. Just because the seller has been named a "trusted" seller does not mean this should be tossed aside. What if the OP isn't the only one who's been in a situation like this?

Named trusted? The OP in this situation called this particular seller trusted. When I found out who it was, it was not a name I had even considered.

There isn't a master list of sellers that are considered trusted by the forum as a whole.

It's up to each individual to make those distinctions.

[imperio]

Originally Posted by Syed117

Named trusted? The OP in this situation called this particular seller trusted. When I found out who it was, it was not a name I had even considered.



There isn't a master list of sellers that are considered trusted by the forum as a whole.



It's up to each individual to make those distinctions.

True - which is why I said if an allegation of this nature is made against any seller the greater community has an interest in knowing who it is.

Any.

Seller.

[Passionata]

Originally Posted by 77T

I wonder...you bring up a point worthy of discussion.
How long should a seller be responsible for a fault s/he didn't see?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Until the turning of the Earth...

[imperio]

Originally Posted by 77T

I wonder...you bring up a point worthy of discussion.
How long should a seller be responsible for a fault s/he didn't see?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depends on how he/she has described the item for sale and what the subsequent fault/issue is... No?

In this case if the seller had said he/she had opened the watch up and found it to be in as new condition then the seller should be held responsible here even after 20 years since a glued together case back is not representative of that, assuming the OP isn't lying about glueing it himself.

Conversely if he/she made no such claim then perhaps 48 hours is a reasonable timeframe.

I find it would be the same as if the OP had found a miyota movement when the watch was opened. Does the seller get to wash his hands off the situation because this wasn't discovered within 48 hours?

[77T]

Originally Posted by Passionata

Until the turning of the Earth...

Was that one day, or one year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by imperio

Depends on how he/she has described the item for sale and what the subsequent fault/issue is... No?

In this case if the seller had said he/she had opened the watch up and found it to be in as new condition then the seller should be held responsible here even after 20 years since a glued together case back is not representative of that, assuming the OP isn't lying about glueing it himself.

Conversely if he/she made no such claim then perhaps 48 hours is a reasonable timeframe.

I find it would be the same as if the OP had found a miyota movement when the watch was opened. Does the seller get to wash his hands off the situation because this wasn't discovered within 48 hours?

I may be overly cautious but all "new to me" used watches go to my watchmaker same or next day. So for me 48 hours works.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jcdeng]

wow, I thought every pre-owned watch would get verified by the seller before it was put up for sell just to make sure its not a franken watch, despite the source. Guess I need to be more careful buying used from this point on.

[Dr.Brian]

No matter what, I think too much time has passed.
And I'll add that I think a lot of watches change hands between dealers complicating the second hand market.
A Lange I wanted to see from a very well known area dealer was unavailable to try on as it was not actually there. Apparently they share listings with other dealers, so you think you're buying from X but it's actually Y. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I trust X, I have no idea who Y is, though they must trust them as the sale would reflect on their reputation.

[TempoKing]

The way I see it...
is that you bought a used watch totally...
covered by the seller Nick (Greek Bum)
I read the Return Policy...
All sales are final except if the item is not as described !!
You had 48 hours to check it and return it if it had problems.
end of story...the rest do not matter... and are suspect.

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by 77T

I may be overly cautious but all "new to me" used watches go to my watchmaker same or next day. So for me 48 hours works.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great advice. I've made a few transactions here with 'trusted' sellers for pre-owned pieces and I've simply relied on the supporting documentation of the watch(es). Now I'm wondering if I need to get them all checked.

[Dr.Brian]

Originally Posted by TempoKing

The way I see it...
is that you bought a used watch totally...
covered by the seller Nick (Greek Bum)
I read the Return Policy...
All sales are final except if the item is not as described !!
You had 48 hours to check it and return it if it had problems.
end of story...the rest do not matter... and are suspect.

Agree.
What does glued on even mean? Locktight? Can't be much as it wasn't a reason to need a new case.
I'd chalk it up as a lesson learned the hard way and find someone to retap the crown. Then good as new. You don't want the RSC servicing your old watches anyway. Their answer is replace everything, vintage patina be damned.
And I'll add that I'm not sure I want a bunch of part time dealers cracking casebacks. I doubt they'll get a pro to do it, and then what about pressure testing?

[imperio]

Looks like his sales policy was pretty thorough. Hard luck, OP.

[Vishy26]

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

OP, a mod has asked you a question.

PMed the mod on this before. As I said in one of the earlier posts, don't want to pull the trigger in haste.

[Vishy26]

[QUOTE=TempoKing;6988473]The way I see it...
is that you bought a used watch totally...
covered by the seller
I read the Return Policy...
All sales are final except if the item is not as described !!
You had 48 hours to check it and return it if it had problems.
end of story...the rest do not matter... and are suspect.



On technicality, seller wins this. Seller knows that, I know that and judging by the responses so far here, many here know that.

I put a man on spot, so I have to contend with the fact that I would become a suspect myself.

Further to that, please clarify if you are willing to on as to why you said "used watch" in your post.

[Vishy26]

Originally Posted by Syed117

As Mon said, it's fairly easy to figure out the seller.

That brings up another point on how people choose the sellers they work with.

Not intended as an attack against this particular seller at all, because he may very well be trustworthy, but not in my list of people I would classify as trusted sellers.

I always say that people should go with the biggest names. Yes, others might be fine and you might pay a little less, but if you're going to buy from a seller here, make sure it's one of top guys.

Syed,
Might not be the case always. There are many small time names who serve well I believe. I dealt with one here, no issues. Just need to get it checked if its a used watch, up to you..

[oldLeatherNeck]

To the OP:

Have you thought of the possibility the RSC stripped / damaged the caseback themselves?

Make a trip to your RSC, and ask to see the damaged parts yourself. Snap couple of pictures for us all to see.

The GLUED caseback does not make much sense to anyone who knows anything about watchmaking. If it was GLUED with locktite, there was no way in hell the RSC could have opened the case back without cutting the case or seriously mangled the caseback.

One thing to know is that doesn't matter how the caseback was put back and glued in,your watch wouldn't have passed the pressure test in the first place. And the seller in this case claimed that it had the pressure test ... (did he state this in his original advert - if he did, ask to see the receipt)

I feel your pain mate.

[Vishy26]

Originally Posted by oldLeatherNeck

To the OP:

Have you thought of the possibility the RSC stripped / damaged the caseback themselves?

Make a trip to your RSC, and ask to see the damaged parts yourself. Snap couple of pictures for us all to see.

The GLUED caseback does not make much sense to anyone who knows anything about watchmaking. If it was GLUED with locktite, there was no way in hell the RSC could have opened the case back without cutting the case or seriously mangled the caseback.

One thing to know is that doesn't matter how the caseback was put back and glued in,your watch wouldn't have passed the pressure test in the first place. And the seller in this case claimed that it had the pressure test ... (did he state this in his original advert - if he did, ask to see the receipt)

I feel your pain mate.

Suspecting that Rolex would have damaged the case while opening.. That's something we can't be serious on, honestly. Rolex does open similar watches numerous times a day.

I asked them if in case I wouldn't go ahead with servicing, how would they intend to return the watch back. They said 'exactly in the same condition we found it'.

Please refer to my post#15 for your other question.. No, in the advert, pressure test wasn't stated. I don't blame the seller for not doing so, not many here state that.

[Dr.Brian]

Originally Posted by Vishy26

On technicality, seller wins this. Seller knows that, I know that and judging by the responses so far here, many here know that.

Respectfully, it wasn't a technicality, it was a clear term of the sale. There were a few actually. All sales final, 48 hours return if not as described, and as is. It seems to have been as described, and it's certainly way beyond the 48 hours. I'm sure your word is good and things are as you say, but that doesn't change the terms of the sale that you accepted. Even if you discovered this right away, he could probably still not accept your return as it was sold as is, though I guess he might have considered it. I think those are common and reasonable terms of sale for these older watches. You can't know what's been done before and unless you're a a watch repair expert, with significant knowledge and experience, you can't guarantee it's all original, etc. Sometimes there's even disagreement about what's original and what's not among the experts.
I feel bad that happened to you. I'm in the market for an expensive pre owned watch myself at the moment. Fortunately mine has a display back so I will have the opportunity to see the movement without having to crack the case open, so that's one less thing I have to worry about.
Good luck with the repair.

[Old Expat Beast]

Is the seller aware of this thread?

[Passionata]

Originally Posted by Al1969

Great advice. I've made a few transactions here with 'trusted' sellers for pre-owned pieces and I've simply relied on the supporting documentation of the watch(es). Now I'm wondering if I need to get them all checked.

For your peace of mind ,yes .

[Vishy26]

Originally Posted by Dr.Brian

Respectfully, it wasn't a technicality, it was a clear term of the sale. There were a few actually. All sales final, 48 hours return if not as described, and as is. It seems to have been as described, and it's certainly way beyond the 48 hours. I'm sure your word is good and things are as you say, but that doesn't change the terms of the sale that you accepted. Even if you discovered this right away, he could probably still not accept your return as it was sold as is, though I guess he might have considered it. I think those are common and reasonable terms of sale for these older watches. You can't know what's been done before and unless you're a a watch repair expert, with significant knowledge and experience, you can't guarantee it's all original, etc. Sometimes there's even disagreement about what's original and what's not among the experts.
I feel bad that happened to you. I'm in the market for an expensive pre owned watch myself at the moment. Fortunately mine has a display back so I will have the opportunity to see the movement without having to crack the case open, so that's one less thing I have to worry about.
Good luck with the repair.

Yes,it is Brian, terms like "sold as is" they are terms of sale and also are a technicality in the world of buying and selling, which I didn't pay attention to. As a buyer, I should have. As a result, chances of me gaining anything here diminished.But not everything is about money,right? Need to know what's right and what's wrong. I said it prior, this is not just about recriminations, if it enlightens certain right methods to potential buyers, it served its purpose

[TempoKing]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Is the seller aware of this thread?

Yes he is - he will address this matter shortly

[greekbum]

This is the original sales advert below along with some correspondence I had with Krishna. Krishna received the watch exactly as described and got some extra free stuff I gave him. In his own words are the feedback he left me after the deal. ....Fast forward 2 years and he writes to me stating that the crown came out and he took the watch to RSC to fix it..... Krishna told me that RSC (told him) the case back threads are stripped (after they opened it) and recommended to him (see below) new case, dial, hands and bracelet (he bought just the head from me) and if I could suggest some possible solutions. I love watches myself and if i can ever help anybody I try and do my best. I was overseas on vacation when he contacted me and spent the day researching this. I spoke to a few watchmakers and they told me this can happen sometimes when a watch is opened up. I found a guy that specializes in retreading cases and case backs and gave the contact information to Krishna. ($300-$600 was the quote)
He wrote me back that he was expecting cash back from me or a 16710 in better condition. My advert is crystal clear. The watch was sold in as is condition with no service history.
There is a return policy. The watch before shipping out to him was taken to a CW21 Rolex watchmaker who also checked out the timing and water tested it.
Everything was fine for the next 2 years. ....On my end I sold Krishna a nice 16710 as stated with no issues. I do not know what has happened in the last 2 years but there was no super glued case etc when the watch left me. Its unfortunate that the case back is stripped out but this is not the sellers fault nor is it krishna's its something that happened.
My watch ad says E serial for the watch I sold Krishna.... the RSC Quote says X serial...? This X serial number is not in any of my records.

Below is also email correspondence.From 2014
Thanks Nick. Insert was fresh great looking in the picture. I was already looking for pepsi inserts in the forum, you spared me of that hassle now. 2 colored nato would be great, if not, no problem, this is looking a good match too, you could leave it there. Is that pink strap leather? I don't link pink color. If you send me the original one you listed I am happy or a picture of any new one you intend to send, I will chose. If you can't send any, thats fine by me too. Appreciate if you could answer the below questions, whatever you say wouldn't bother me much, its only for my record for future if I intend to sell it. If are not aware of the below information its fine.
1. How many times do you think was the watch polished in its life time
2. How many owners did it have in the past? do you think it was worn regularly?
3.I understand there is no service history, I saw that before committing to the deal. But do you think its good to go for at least 2 years? ( if not I have plans to service it locally in the near future)


Regards,
Krishna

Krishna,
Ill let you know as soon as funds show up in my account. It takes a few days sometimes. Ill give you the blue and the black red leather nato :) In all honesty i am a watch dealer and buy and sell lots of watches. i bought this from another dealer with no history.I did however take it to my watchmaker who put it on a timing machine and said its within cosec specs and it didn’t need a service and was running fine. I would wear it and enjoy it myself.
Best
Nick

[TempoKing]

Originally Posted by greekbum

My watch ad says E serial for the watch I sold Krishna.... the RSC Quote says X serial...? This X serial number is not in any of my records.

I can't believe Rolex would have made such a mistake
- they are "trusted watchmakers"
...Only $6,000 US for a case, bracelet, dial (they get to keep the vintage one), hands and a bit of oil....lol

[Vishy26]

Nick, thanks for coming down here.. My first two E-mails to you are down below(don't wan't to paste your responses without your say).. Now to the last part which was more concerning..

Hi Nick,

I bought a 16710 from you. I wore it only in the initial weeks and later was back to my two tone GMT 116713. Recently, I was trying to wind the watch and the crown came off. So I thought its service time. Took it to Rolex yesterday and today they came back saying the case needs to be replaced and that I need to pay AUD 4180 for just that alone. Called them up and they said "thread in the case middle and the back is damaged" and that it must be replaced. I will forward their quote for the service to you in a separate E-mail. Appreciate if you suggest some possible solutions here.

Regards,

Krishna


Hi there Nick,

Sorry to bother you while you are overseas. This Rolex quote today hit me like a ton of bricks. Anyway, thanks for responding. As per Rolex this damage existed before and they don't want to fix it, instead wants to replace it. I believe it existed before it reached me, as I only used it lightly. No local shop here does this kind of job and they don't even have parts account with Rolex anymore. Honestly, I was expecting a cash back from you or a replacement 16710 in better condition(Existing watch and Cash coming your way, so be it. Fair price that you quote depending on the watch condition, I will pay)

I have no right to engage you in any problematic conversation while you are overseas. You don't need to respond to me till you are back home.

Regards,
Krishna

[imperio]

Seller has a good and concise response. Glad to hear both sides of the story.

[Old Expat Beast]

So the watch advertised was an E serial and the watch that Rolex was given is an X serial? Something wrong somewhere along the line.

[Andad]

Hi Nick,

Yes, an interesting situation with the serial numbers. X versus E.

The first 3 numbers X963 are shown on the Rolex quote.
Are these the first 3 numbers of the E Rolex you sold the OP?

Just trying to work out if there was a mistake made with the letter or if it is a different watch?

Eddie.

Was typing this as you posted Adam.

[Vishy26]

I notified you the issue about the tight bezel rotation a few weeks after, if you remember, you agreed to send me a click spring, it never arrived. Took this to Max Schweizer in Sydney, he said he had none. He gave me the serial number on that day as its a watch with head only. Watch was never opened or authenticated. (If he opens, he will charge 50 to put it back to make it water proof) I noted the serial mismatch. But what is the diffrence between an X-serial and E-serial? They both are from 1991 as per Bob watches websites, no big deal, thats the feeling I had. I even contacted members here asking a suggestion for my X-serial, check the thread below to prove that I am not hiding anything. I revealed a few here that I bought X-series from a seller here.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=474169

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=475063

yes, X-series is what I hold. But now the focus shifts on to case serial

[Vishy26]

Originally Posted by TempoKing

I can't believe Rolex would have made such a mistake
- they are "trusted watchmakers"
...Only $6,000 US for a case, bracelet, dial (they get to keep the vintage one), hands and a bit of oil....lol

Anastasios,
RSC didn't make a mistake here. Its the same serial that Max had given me that day(its saved on my Samsung S note), it matches to what they have. Only two things here
1. Either I am not telling the truth
2. Nick didn't get the serial checked


I request folks not to jump to conclusions on this.